RichRMA: With ISO capabilities what they are today, why would you need a tripod collar on a lens with a maximum 200mm focal length and stabilization? Night shots?

Why? How about ease of use handheld? When I shoot soccer (from a stool) I have one camera with a 300 f/2.8 on a monopod and another body with a Nikon 70-200 beside me. When I shift from the 300 to the zoom, the foot of the tripod ring sits in the palm of my left hand. My fingers extend upwards and manipulate the zoom ring. Used in this manner, I'm not supporting the camera with a moving part of the lens (the zoom ring). (I've thought about taking a small piece of hardwood and sculpting it to a contoured base for more comfort...Maybe one of these days.)

ljclark: 1. If Nikon is trying to gauge the mirrorless market in North America based on their own product, they are likely suffering from cranial rectal inversion. Maybe Nikon mirrorless sales are declining...

2. I don't know if DPReview was softballing on purpose, but where was the APS-C/D400 question?

3. If Nikon tells us that Dfs are in short supply then I guess we have to believe them. (Assuming they are manufacturing them as fast as possible.) Meanwhile, Fuji showed they how it should be done -- with the X-T1. Odd that in the U.S., which is supposed to be the mirrorless Dead Zone, my local retailer tells me that the X-T1 has produced pre-orders unlike any camera other than the D800.

BTW -- Could we turn the tables and let Nikon license the Fuji X-Trans sensor for a D400? My D300 bodies are getting tired.

Venancio,

You're right...I did miss that. Kinda makes you wonder how many "requests" they need to get. But I guess it is good that they are going to consider considering.

1. If Nikon is trying to gauge the mirrorless market in North America based on their own product, they are likely suffering from cranial rectal inversion. Maybe Nikon mirrorless sales are declining...

2. I don't know if DPReview was softballing on purpose, but where was the APS-C/D400 question?

3. If Nikon tells us that Dfs are in short supply then I guess we have to believe them. (Assuming they are manufacturing them as fast as possible.) Meanwhile, Fuji showed they how it should be done -- with the X-T1. Odd that in the U.S., which is supposed to be the mirrorless Dead Zone, my local retailer tells me that the X-T1 has produced pre-orders unlike any camera other than the D800.

BTW -- Could we turn the tables and let Nikon license the Fuji X-Trans sensor for a D400? My D300 bodies are getting tired.

Sean65: If I remember right, my Nikon D700 had one firmware update in four years. I used to be proud of this as it suggested 'how right' Nikon got the camera, first time round.

Fuji have a different approach. It's more like 'live R&D'. It's not a good thing in most cases. Fuji seem to be balancing on the edge of greatness but ALWAYS get let down by their designs.

I think that Fuji displayed more than enough "technical arrogance" when the initial X100 and the orb-prone X-10 came out. As a result, they got some dope smacks. Now I believe they have become more of a learning organization. They recognize that regardless of how good things look in the lab and with the focus groups, the community of real world users is going to give you the most valuable feedback.

Fuji can (a) turn that feedback into the next incremental hardware update and sell those new cameras instead, or (b) they can suck it up and develop firmware updates -- some that fix bugs or inconveniences, and some that add new features to the existing models.

It seems that Fuji is embarking on option (b) -- and with more vigor than anyone would have forecast. And rather than view the updates as a product of "sucking it up", they seem to have embraced the sound of a paradigm shifting smoothly into the next gear.

hpy2bsal: I own a DSLR but I didn't want the bring a backpack of camera gear on a three-week trip through Europe. I bought the X100S specifically because of its compact size and f/2 lens.

I was very nervous whether the 23mm fixed lens would work under all shooting circumstances but there wasn't a single time I wished I had brought a different camera. Whether I was shooting the interior of Notre Dame at night, the expanse of the Swiss Alps, the UCI Road World Championships along the streets of Florence during a torrential thunderstorm, or one of my meals at dinner, my X was the perfect camera. I probably could have sold three X's to fellow tour members once they saw the quality of my images. Attached to the Black Rapid SnapR 35 Bag and Strap and slung diagonally across my chest, my X was super lightweight and easily accessible. Even when handheld, I barely noticed the weight of the camera.

I'm already planning another trip to Europe next year and my X will be the only camera I'm bringing.

Actually, Biggles266, I think we have identified the party lacking "imagination or creativity". A good photographer could, if he or she chose to, launch a travel assignment with a single camera and a single lens -- and come back with 8 to 14 compelling, publication-worthy photographs that told the story. I'm not saying that is the best premise for an assignment, but a good photographer could do it.

No matter what you are carrying, you pass up thousands of compelling images every day. If you shot them all, no matter what camera you were carrying, your hands would be flying like a wind-up drummer boy. If anything, the single lens experiment, which some have had to do for class assignments way back when, is a true test of imagination and creativity.

white shadow: The X100s is a reasonably good camera for casual use and perhaps for travel. Some like the " Leica look alike" look because they couldn't afford the real McCoy Leica M. It is a fairly good camera to take casual portraits. That's about it.

A full frame DSLR is still the more versatile camera if one is serious about photography despite its heavier weight. It will deliver the goods expected of a professional photographer or for those who engaged them to shoot.

Similar to a Micro 4/3 camera, it will remain a camera for casual use or for collectors who like the look. For practical casual use, the Ricoh GR may be better. For sheer convenience, the Lumix LX7 is surprisingly very useful despite its much smaller sensor especially in low light.

White Shadow is one of those guys who needs to check out all the other guys standing in the men's room. It must be great to live in a world where the size of something is more important than knowing how to do something with it.

I remember getting on a cross-country flight and realizing that a well-known male porn star was across the aisle (his T-shirt was a clue). He was a "Pro" but for all his full-frame-ness, there he was in a middle seat in coach along with the rest of us. Size didn't make a bit of difference in the real world.

MarcMedios: All good (and an excellent quality) except for the lack of interchangeable lens. Who wants to take pictures with just the one lens that some anonymous designer chose for you in Japan?

Anonymous designer in Japan? ROFL. One of the things you find out, if you take the time, is that the 35mm lens FOV works out pretty well in a wide variety of situations for many photographers. That isn't a designer's decision, it's decades of photographic practice. My default lens on an M6 was a C/V 35mm. On the M8 a 25mm, and on the M9 a 35mm. The X100/X100S just leveraged what many, many photographers figured out a long time ago.

To be truthful, if you can't take an X100/X100S (or any other camera with a single lens) out for a week-long trip and not end up with dozens of good photographs, you aint much of a photographer.

JohnLL: To me, at these standard settings, the only material difference I can see, besides the moiré issue, is that PN seems to have more saturated colours and slightly higher contrast than ACR. I think these issues, if you regard them as such, could be fixed in ACR without much difficulty.

It has been suggested that increasing the Photo Ninja chroma noise reduction might help with the Moire.

"Billed as a way to bring back the romance of the darkroom in the smartphone era..."

Oh Lord. I can see this swiftly turning from "romance" to a relationship gone horribly bad.

Nothing like getting things on paper to show people how bad their smartphone images really look. It might stand a chance it the final print is about half the size of the original smartphone screen, but what's the point in that?

I think this system is going to produce a few really, really crappy looking prints...And then all the stuff (perhaps with the exception of the cool LED safelight) is going into the dustbin.

(unknown member): What's the point if Fujifilm is not going to use their better technology sensor?

The point? Because Fuji is beginning to get some wider brand recognition, but this target group is very price sensitive. Most users will have one print made per every 1,000 shots (if that), and in that environment the X-Trans sensor is more of a distraction than a feature.

Fuji hasn't as many cards to play as Nikon and Canon, but I wouldn't call this a bluff. There is still risk due to the decline low-end camera sales due to competition from smart phones. I'm not sure anyone knows where the cut-off point is -- the bottom of the mirrorless market vs. the upper range of the smart phones (where smart phones can still take a bite out of camera sales).